Every figure this model derived for AVBH, the value it took, and
the element in the company's own XBRL it was read from — so any of it can be checked
against the filing rather than taken on trust.
As at 2025-09-30.
The figures, and where each came from
This is the part no other screener shows. Each figure below names the XBRL element it
was read from, so it can be checked against the filing itself.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
44,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2026-06-30
cash
159,909,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
equity
296,185,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
53,662,000
InterestPaidNet
2026-06-30
ocf
52,470,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
-58,143,000
Revenues
2025-09-30
sbc
3,231,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AVBH on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
dilution pct
14.45
revenue growth
-1494.32
revenue growth per share
-1318.28
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AVBH's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: every margin -- revenue is -58,143,000, and a share of a negative total is not a share. Divided into a negative result it produced a confident positive, which is the reading this withholds. The margins are absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
only 272 days of filings, not a full year: margins and growth are measured, but return on capital and every enterprise-value multiple are refused rather than annualised
no operating income found in XBRL
no forward EPS estimate; growth rests on filings only. Analyst consensus is not published in XBRL, so it has to be fetched from a data provider or set by hand in overrides.yaml as `eps_growth_2y`
quality DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, sbc discipline, owner earnings, cash operating margin not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
valuation DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 2 inputs could be computed (ev ebit, ev owner earnings not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
durability DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, contracted coverage, gross margin stability, cash flow stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
resilience DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 3 inputs could be computed (interest cover, liquidity not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (sustained growth, margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
5 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, resilience, growth -- 100% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left